Bug 1682212 Comment 44 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:16:51 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:
process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

Without Bug 1702715:
process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Revision 1 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:17:03 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Revision 2 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:17:24 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

First Header | Second Header
------------ | -------------
Content from cell 1 | Content from cell 2
Content in the first column | Content in the second column

Revision 3 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:17:32 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

Without Bug 1702715:

process | Initial | After 20 reloads | After GC/CC
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Revision 4 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:19:25 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Note: this is done with a clean profile

Revision 5 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:25:39 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

With Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


While the main process leak has not changed much, there's still a significant improvement for the web process leak. Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Note: this is done with a clean profile

Revision 6 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:26:48 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

With Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


The main process leak has not changed much, and we did not really expect Bug 1702715 to help there.
However there is a significant improvement for the web process leak, which goes from 600MB to 60MB. 

Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Note: this is done with a clean profile

Revision 7 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:27:30 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- open cnn.com
- open devtools with the inspector selected
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 | 587 | 548
content process  | 111 | 847 | 716 

With Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 | 580 | 552
content process  | 113 | 240 | 173 


The main process leak has not changed much, and we did not really expect Bug 1702715 to help there.
However there is a significant improvement for the web process leak, which goes from 600MB to 60MB. 

Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Note: this is done with a clean profile

Revision 8 by

Julian Descottes [:jdescottes]

on 2021-08-19 00:35:27 PDT

I re-tested the STRs from the summary:
- open cnn.com
- open devtools with the inspector selected
- check memory for main and web process in about:memory
- reload cnn.com 20 times, 
- check the memory
- force gc/cc
- check the memory 

I get the following results:

Without Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 224 MB | 587 MB | 548 MB
content process  | 111 MB | 847 MB | 716 MB 

With Bug 1702715:

**process** | **Initial** | **After 20 reloads** | **After GC/CC**
------------ | ------------- | ------------- | -------------
main process | 252 MB | 580 MB | 552 MB
content process  | 113 MB | 240 MB | 173 MB


The main process leak has not changed much, and we did not really expect Bug 1702715 to help there.
However there is a significant improvement for the web process leak, which goes from 600MB to 60MB. 

Maybe this is not true in all test cases, and that's why if Bug 1702715 didn't help with a specific use case, it would be great to get detailed steps to reproduce.

Note: this is done with a clean profile

Back to Bug 1682212 Comment 44